July 23, 2014, 05:51:17 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - KyleSTL

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 28
Lenses / Re: IS Versions of the 50mm, 85mm & 135mm Coming? [CR1]
« on: November 27, 2013, 01:24:35 PM »
If the "Year of the Lens" turns out to be just slapping IS on some existing lenses, I will be highly disappointed.

Um, have you seen the 35mm IS versus the old 35mm f/2?: TDP Link
Or versus even the 35mm f/1.4L (at f/2): TDP Link

You can't tell me that lens is not impressive considering its size and price.  I know its not nearly as impressive as the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art, but it's also much smaller and costs half as much.  On paper it is the most hand-holdable lens ever made (using the 1/FL rule of thumb, a sharp picture could be had at 1/2 to 1/2.5 sec).

The 24mm IS and 28mm IS are just as good, and I, for one, welcome our new higher-quality non-L lenses.  I think I'll probably pick up the 50mm when it is released.  I wasn't happy with the 50mm 1.8II or 50mm 1.8 I, and I think the focusing definitely needs improvement on the 50mm 1.4 (especially when used with a focusing system like the 5D Mark I).

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2013, 10:00:40 PM »
Second, more recent Ring USM lenses (once attached to an enabled body) are capable of the same precision & speed of screw-type STM, so while older USM lenses may need to be upgraded newer ones should work fine with DPAF.

I think the question is whether they can be as graceful at starting and stopping their refocus as the STMs.  For video, speed of focus is secondary to smoothness.
And noise as well. From everything I've heard, STM is quieter than USM (even the newest USM lenses like 24, 28 and 35mm IS primes). Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 25, 2013, 04:53:55 PM »
You also seem to think that the original 1Ds DSLR was un-innovative. It was the first FF DSLR!
Unfortunately incorrect -

Contax N Digital - July 2000
Kodak DCS Pro 14n - Sept 2002
Canon 1Ds - Sept 2002
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n - Feb 2004
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c - Mar 2004
Canon 1Ds Mark II - Sept 2004
Canon 5D - August 2005
Canon 1Ds Mark III - Aug 2007
Nikon D3 - Aug 2007
Nikon D700 - Jul 2008
Sony DSLR-A900 - Sept 2008

If you were to say the first FF DSLR by a company that is still in business, or the first FF DSLR that was commerically viable then you would be correct (Contax was a total flop, and Kodak didn't survive long either, despite adopting cameras with both Nikon and Canon lens mounts).

Lenses / Re: Lots of New Lenses Coming in 2014 [CR2]
« on: November 25, 2013, 03:52:17 PM »

There is only one EF lens with STM (the 40mm f/2.8 STM along side the 3 EF-S and 3 EF-M STM lenses).  When they release a full frame camera that utilizes DPAF (IMO less than 18 months from now) they will be in desperate need of a whole range of EF lenses to go along with the advanced movie AF.  I say 2 or 3 lenses next year will be FF and have STM motors.  If they want to make their cinema customers euphoric they will make said lenses parfocal and with very little focus breathing (unlikely, as I'm sure they want to protect their Cinema line of cameras and lenses).  I know one of the big drawbacks of the 40mm f/2.8 STM for movie making is the fact that it has so much focus breathing (a function of its pancake design).

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 21, 2013, 05:48:06 PM »
Interesting is NIKON who first went into the battle not with CANON but with MF cameras in general. Now Canon lost a competition and no one can't ever tell me that they don't have the MEGA pixels since 2002....
Are you saying Canon has never had the megapixel crown since 2002 (excluding MF competition)?  Because that is an outright lie.

1994 - Kodak DCS420 - 2MP
1995 - Kodak DCS460 - 6MP
2002 - Kodak DCS Pro 14n - 14MP (released just prior to Canon 1Ds, 11MP; Nikon's 12MP D2X came in 2004)
2004 - Canon 1Ds Mark II - 16MP
2007 - Canon 1Ds Mark III - 21MP (followed by Canon 5D Mark II in 2008)
2008 - Sony A900 - 24MP (followed by 24MP Nikon D3X in late 2008, and Sony A850 in 2009)
2012 - Nikon D800/D800E - 36MP (followed by Sony A7R in 2013)
2013 - Nokia Lumia 1020 - 41MP (I know, rediculous inclusion - facts remain)

Canon had the highest resolution sensor for a solid 4 years until Sony came out with it's 24MP FF sensor. 

Leaderboard (for those keeping score):
   Kodak - 10 years
   Nikon - 6 years and counting (4 shared jointly with Sony, Nokia excluded)
   Canon - 4 years
   Sony - 4 years and counting

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 20, 2013, 01:12:59 PM »
When someone attacks a Canon body, you always resort to raw sales. That'S not very interesting.

The point of citing sales figures is that profit is the primary driver for publicly-traded companies like Canon and Nikon, and what they care about is developing products that will sell well and provide a return on investment, not products that will please a minority segment of the market that happens to be very vocal on internet forums. 

You may not find it interesting, but that's the reality of business...and the reality that determines what products are available to purchase (or in some cases, products that people have no intention of purchasing, but choose to complain about anyway).   

I'd also suggest that elaborating on a rational viewpoint is more interesting than a weak, one-line 'refutation'.

Exactly.  Same reasoning that Nikon's currently weak profitability has caused them to announce consolidation of camera lines to offer fewer products (in point and shoot lines) and focus on entry-level equipment (interchangable formats) to stengthen their financial situation:


Think the group of vocal Nikon enthusiasts asking for their D300s replacement will ever get it?

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 20, 2013, 11:16:57 AM »
... This camera will be Canon’s first foray into the high megapixel realm for a DSLR.
What is your definition of high megapixel?  Back in 2002 when the 1Ds was announced, 11MP was a lot compared to most other DSLRs at 6 or less, and most P&S cameras less than 5MP.  In 2005 16MP was considered 'high resolution' (1Ds Mark II).  Same with 21MP in 2007 with the 1Ds Mark III.

I completely understand what you are saying, but it's not like Canon has never been competitive on the MP front, as they have definitely worn the megapixel crown a few times.  Now in the modern era (since Sept 2009) they have constantly lagged behind Nikon and Sony with full frame cameras (21MP vs 24; 22 vs 36), but lead in the APS-C lines from Sept 2009 through August 2011 with the 18MP sensors, until being superceded by Sony's 24MP sensor in the A65 and A77.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Japan Teases a White Kiss
« on: November 11, 2013, 09:12:49 AM »
And here I thought that the Korean teaser was going to result in the SL X (SL1 body with 1D X sensor).  :P  Take note, Canon, a brilliant idea and perfect name.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 31, 2013, 11:26:40 AM »
I totally agree with Zv about starting off with just the 18-135 STM and becoming accustomed to using it and master it's operation.  At that point you'll know what your missing (lens too slow, need more telephoto, need wider angles, need macro lens, need more light).  At that point use Ruined's list as a guide for your next purchase.  None of us will know your style, shooting habits and therefore needs, so it would be a disservice to recommend another lens without knowing whether it is necessary for your needs.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 30, 2013, 10:34:34 AM »
Three other good lenses for indoors:

EF 35mm f/2 IS USM - $550
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM - $450
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 HSM DC Art - $500

And the EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM mentioned by Ruined ($500 currently).  Here's a good website for tracking current prices, deals etc:


Unfortunately Canon has not made an APS-C fast normal lens like Nikon (AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX - $200), so the Sigma prime is the only non-FF option (and isn't significantly cheaper than the Canon options, but does have a 2/3 stop advantage in aperture).

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 05:28:54 PM »
I think the EOS would be a good budget choice, as long as you understand the limitations outlined by Mt Spokane.  I think the AF speed is improved based on what I've seen with the newer firmware 2.0.2 (although it is well short of DSLR speed for still, probably comparable to T4i/T5i for video).  EOS M has all the same PTvAvM modes as a DSLR, so yes, you will be able to set shutter speed, ISO and aperture.  I would suggest going to Best Buy or a camera store and play around with them, that might help you decide whether or not the design and 'feel' (focus speed especially) of the EOS M are acceptable.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 01:23:51 PM »
Unfortunately Canon has nothing even remotely comparable to the Sony RX100 II at the moment.
The G1X is not 'remotely comparable'?  While it is not in the same size/form factor it has several advantages over the RX100 II

Yes, you are right. "Remotely comparable". However, I'd take an RX100II any time over a G1X. Not only because of the smaller size, but also because I believe [not checked] that RX-100 II beats the G1X in image quality - despite the sensor size difference. At least at the most frequently used lower ISO settings.

As far as the S-120 or G16 are concerned: they are not even remotely comparable to the RX100-II.  :-)
Granted, the RX100 II has 20 MP (vs. 14MP for G1X and 12MP for S120/G16) so it will have better resolution at base ISO (~20% higher linear resolution all things being equal), but will that make much or any difference at higher ISOs, or printed < 30x40, or shared online?  Although, now that I'm thinking of it, the RX100 II will have a FL advantage over the G1X when cropped to 12MP (120mm vs. 112mm).

I agree that RX100 II is a significantly better camera than S120 or G16, but there are a few attributes that favor the latter that are worth consideration (priority will obviously be determined by the buyer/user).  The FL advantage disappears for the S120 when the Sony is cropped to 12MP (129mm), but the G16 still has a very slight advantage (140mm).

Overall, the RX100 II is a superior camera to the other three I've listed, but does not have an advantage in all specifications, so I made comparison to outline the Canon options that are available.

To the OP, it would be a shame for you to spend a lot of money on a camera (with instantaneous depreciation) and not be happy with the results (especially in regards to video AF performance).  I would suggest looking up reviews and/or demonstrations that highlight AF performance in video (DP Review, The Camera Store, etc) for the various cameras you are considering (ideally all using the same lens).  If you go the DSLR route I think all of us can agree that STM lenses are a must (since you're planning on using the video function), with the 70D being ideal, followed by the 100D (SL1), then the 650D (T4i) and 700D (T5i).  And remember, no camera you're thinking about is as expensive as buying two if you're unhappy with the results produced by the first purchase.  I'm not trying to up-sell you or anything, I just want to give you all the information I have so you end up with a camera that you're happy with.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 29, 2013, 11:25:16 AM »
Unfortunately Canon has nothing even remotely comparable to the Sony RX100 II at the moment.

The G1X is not 'remotely comparable'?  While it is not in the same size/form factor it has several advantages over the RX100 II (which is an outstanding camera in its segment):

- Larger sensor (almost APS-C size)
- Slightly longer zoom (112mm vs. 100mm)
- Fully articulated screen
- Slower lens, but equivalent DOF control compared to RX100 II (slightly worse on wide end, and better on long end) because of larger sensor - see below

Heck even the G16 or S120 could be thrown into the mix with a couple of advantages over the RX100 II (at the compromise of a much smaller sensor):
- S120 gains 24mm wide end and goes longer to 120mm (although slower lens at the long end by ~1/3 stop)
- G16 has very fast lens (f/1.8-2.8) and goes to 140mm on the long end (and has very comparable DOF control - see charts above)
- G16 can do 12.2 fps for 6 shots and 9.3 fps for 522 shots and S120 can do 12.1 fps for 6 shots and 9.4 fps for 635 shots (RX100 II does 10 fps for 14 shots then slows to 2 fps)
- Better video compression with Digic 6 processor and more frame rate options (1080p60, 1080p30, 720p30, 480p30), whereas the Sony only does 1080p60 and 480p30

Obvious disadvantages for S120 and G16 are bad high ISO performance, lack of tilting screen, and S120 has significant disadvantage in DOF control compared to RX100 II.

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: This momma is looking to buy a camera ?
« on: October 28, 2013, 03:27:28 PM »
I would say the 70D would be a good fit if you are going to be doing a lot of videos.  The highly advanced dual-pixel AF allows the user to focus on composition and movement more than pulling focus.  Get STM lenses (18-55 STM, 40 STM, 18-135 STM, 55-250 STM) and you basically have the most advanced camcorder on the market.  You might be happy with the other AF-C capable cameras in movie mode, but you can't do better than the 70D in the Canon lineup (or arguably in anyone's lineup).  As long as it isn't breaking the bank, 70D is the way to go in my opinion.

Lenses / Re: Image of the New 100-400?
« on: October 25, 2013, 11:25:23 AM »
It's an adapted Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 as seen here: http://kenrockwell.com/minolta/maxxum/80-200mm-f28.htm

The flange distance for Konica-Minolta is only 0.5mm longer than EF.  No chance of mount adapter for that without losing infinity focus.  You could change out the mount itself to EF, but it would still be a manual focus lens with no aperture control (wide-open only).  I can't see anyone with a press pass to photograph the World Series doing that.


Another suggestion from a man who knows everything about lenses.  He thinks it’s a “28-300 with filter barrel removed”.

So Roger think it's a modified 28-300mm.  Any pictures online of such a beast?  Any reason given for why one would modify it as such?

Game 2 picture from the gigapan - same guy (hard to tell since his face is obscured, but he's in the same area as Game 1)?  If so, he's a Canon shooter, as that is the 200-400mm f/4L.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 28